I Disagree MD PhD Dr Dr Bane [provide your own Batman joke on the blanks]

here, an MD PhD defends the indefensible and you can't make this stuff up [e.g., the condescending arrogance of her apologetic's title, yet the nonsense she is defending so easy to disprove]:

001. at wilsontimes.com, MD Bane writes in "Do Your Homework on Naturopathic Medicine" (2018-06-29) [2018 archived]:

"Susan Bane, M.D., is an associate professor of physical education and sport studies at Barton College and a women's health physician who earned her medical and PhD degrees at the University of Illinois [...] she is an Institute for functional medicine certified practitioner [...and she writes] on Tuesday, The Wilson Times ran an In Our Opinion piece titled 'Licensing Quacks Undermines Trust in Medical Doctors.' The author desired to bring attention to House Bill 277, which establishes a work group to develop recommendations to oversee naturopathic doctors. The author went on to share why we should call our state representatives and tell them to say no to 'designating state-approved snake oil salesmen' [...]";

I agree.

"my name is Susan Bane and I am an allopathic trained doctor (MD). I would like to share a different perspective than this opinion piece and urge you to understand current information before you decide to call your representative to say yes or no. First, the editorial claims naturopathic doctors are quacks. Quacks are defined as people who pretend to have medical skills. Naturopathic doctors do have medical skills. They attend medical school just like I did (https://aanmc.org/naturopathic-schools/) [...]";

so, actually, allopathic medicine is not the medicine of this modern age.  If anything, it was the medicine of 1800. It is ignorant to call modern medicine allopathy just because it somehow seems in parallel in name with naturopathy and osteopathy. And current information!  See 002. And naturopaths go to naturopathy school, that's why they can't sit for the USMLE. Plus, even an MD can practice quackery. Just ask MD Sears whom California just sanctioned.

"there are actually four types of medical school in the U.S., and all require the successful completion of a rigorous curriculum to graduate. Each have curriculum grounded in courses such as anatomy and physiology, biochemistry, histology and microbiology. Each differs in philosophy and focus of care: allopathic medical school (MD) [...] osteopathic medical school (DO) [...] naturopathic medical school (ND): training focuses on utilizing the most natural, least invasive, least toxic interventions; chiropractic medical school (DC): training is a hands-on, drug-free approach to health [...]";

actually, this is a false equation.  Chiropractic is hugely not a medical school, who are we kidding. And naturopathy, at its foundation, in not rigor it is nonsense.  See 002. Yet we're promised sciences as a grounding.  What bullshit. Is a subluxation, the foundation of chiro., science grounded? No. So chiro. is misrepresented here.  And so is naturopathy.  See 002.

"all medical schools must go through a rigorous process to receive accreditation and all four types of doctors must pass a licensure exam to be board-certified [...]";

actually, the board certification in naturopathy, NPLEX, engages in epistemic fraud, because, after all, it falsely labels homeopathy and kind a clinical science.

"not all therapies have scientific evidence to support them, though many do, with acupuncture being one of the strongest [...]";

oh my.  We know acupuncture is an elaborate and theatrical placebo.  It doesn't matter where you stick the needles or even if you stick the needles.

002. my comment was:

[I've added hypertext links]

 "Naturocrit: Of course, doing homework is important. Like one could go the Wikipedia and see that naturopathy is based on vitalism and that is science-ejected and contains homeopathy and that too is science ejected yet naturopathy claims the category science. And that is pseudoscience. Ok, you don't like Wikipedia. So, go the NUNM, the oldest school of naturopathy in North America, and find that naturopathy is based on vitalism and then they claim that such survives scientific scrutiny along with homeopathy. So, multiple lines of evidence that naturopathy is a quack pseudoscience. Some people get a failing grade on their homework. But I don't have an MD or a PhD so maybe there's some special kind of thinking I can't reach in terms of nonsense apologetics. -r.c.";

so, it is an objective fact that naturopathy is not what it claims to be, yet we have here an MD PhD defending the ND nonsensical position.  It's crazy. It's disturbing.

003. so, here I leave some blanks for anyone to write in a Bane-like Batman pontification:

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________